Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Dual core not gaming rig? (AMD)

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
January 15, 2006 12:01:27 AM

sorry for another Dual core and Single core thread but i have heard many people saying that dual core is not really for gaming and that the A64 4000+ etc are
the AMD64 4000+ core specs are
Core Speed: 2.4Ghz
L1 Cache: 128KB
L2 Cache: 1024KB

and a AMD64x2 3800+
Frequency: 2.0 Ghz
L1 Cache per core: 128KB
L2 Cache per core: 512KB

Prices are identical and the dual core has an extra 128kb L1 cache.
If you overclick the 3800+ to ~2.4 Ghz frequency would it not perform like a 4000+ and still have an edge of being dual core? Of course you could always overclock the 4000+ more.

But I would like to know why people say that dual cores are not for gaming?


(sorry if i post any incorrect information I'm new here and still learning)
a b à CPUs
January 15, 2006 12:56:46 PM

.."but i have heard many people saying that dual core is not really for gaming and that the A64 4000+ etc are "

If assembling a new system today, I would choose a dual core X2 variant too....(provided you are getting Win XP Pro to utilize the 2nd core)
a b à CPUs
January 15, 2006 12:59:41 PM

"You get roughly around 20% increase in performance in most games. "

That's a bit optimistic, IMO; at the typical gpu- bound resolutions that most play games at, really only QUake4 is showing a drastic difference *IF* the res is below 1600x1200...
Related resources
February 2, 2006 3:28:35 AM

Hey everyone, I'm new to this forum. My AMD 2500 Barton core(OCed 3200 or 2.2Gz) is getting too old for todays games. I have an old ATI9500pro which has served me well for a couple years. I just added a 500watt psu for my upcoming upgrade of new mobo, cpu, 7800?, and 2gb of whatever I decide on. I was reading the above debate on dualcore vs the AMD64 4000. Most of the game benchmarks have the 4000 giving the dual core cpu's a run for the $$$$ on THG CPU test. I'm at odds on the X2 3800 or the 4000. I know the 3800 will be a daul 4800 after I'm done with it ,but even the AMD64 4000 comes within range of it on game benchmarks. I can care less about multitasking BS because I shut everything down when running Flight SIM, Call of Duty2, ....etc. Anybody have any suggestions before I put down 1200-1400$ on a new mobo, cpu gpu,ram and SATA HD. :roll:
February 2, 2006 4:11:30 AM

dual cores make for fine gaming machines. you may not be able to squeeze as much bang/buck in terms of gaming, but you may enjoy the dual core more if u multitask heavily. in say, a year from now, would be when you'd really appreciate that you paid an extra $100 for dual core - btw, i recommend opty 165/170 over x2
February 3, 2006 8:13:30 PM

I'll be getting a 4400+ soon within the next week to replace my 3000+ @ 2.6ghz. I'll let you know if I notice any differences.
February 3, 2006 9:56:15 PM

Notice how a measly 2.4GHz clocked non FX dual core chip comes amazingly close to matching the premium FX-55 chip? 8O 8O
Notice something else, it is beating a single core Athlon64 4000+ 2.4GHz CPU in every benchmark??? 8O 8O
What, this can't be right???
Dual core beating every benchmark of the same speed single core variant!!!!

They must be biased and skewed to favor dual core but in reality single core is faster. :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 








February 5, 2006 9:25:22 PM

I get very similar scores to an FX-55 on a 3000+. :D 

Im hoping to get my 4400 up to 2.6ghz at least.
February 5, 2006 9:52:41 PM

You'll probably be able to do it.
February 9, 2006 9:40:50 PM

My 4400+ only seems to max out at 2420mhz!!! :cry: 

I have it at 222mhz fsb, 11x mult, stock voltages, 4x hypertransport, ram 'underclocked' to 444mhz.

Increasing the FSB any more causes an error message at start saying that boot failed and to re-enter setup and load default settings. Increasing the vcore voltage doesnt help either.

:cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry: 
February 9, 2006 9:58:57 PM

Try raising the latency of the RAM, somehting like 3-3-3-12.
Also, you can try a 10x or 10.5x multiplier and ramp up FSB.
February 9, 2006 10:04:19 PM

Already tried setting the ram to 333mhz. Reducing the multiplier at higher FSBs has the same problem. The ram works fine up to 516mhz, so thats not the problem. I must have got a bad chip
February 11, 2006 9:19:25 PM

Nope, its worse. Its the ASUS A8N-SLI non deluxe. Im also having problems updating the bios (currently 1008) as I get a disk I/O error when trying to boot of a boot disk. Ive emailed asus about this and am waiting for them to reply.
February 11, 2006 10:06:39 PM

Dual core are awesome for gaming. Some system uses primarily one core in dual core cpu when it comes to gaming. But now drivers like Nvidia are taking advantage of both cores as some of the games and the ones coming out in the near future. Perfect example is the XBox 360 having 3 cores of 3.2 eac. and soon to come PS3 that sports a cell processor with 8 core which 7 of those core are for the gaming part.

Dual/Multi core processor really are the future for gaming. Example, one core would do the rendering and physics as the other do the rest like the effects, shadowing, aa or something like it. PS3 will do this with its 8-core cell processor.
February 12, 2006 2:58:32 AM

Quote:
Already tried setting the ram to 333mhz. Reducing the multiplier at higher FSBs has the same problem. The ram works fine up to 516mhz, so thats not the problem. I must have got a bad chip


you misunderstood RichPLS. He was not telling you to put the RAM to 333Mhz, but to set the RAM timings to 3-3-3-12. Loosen the timings a bit, it should work.
February 12, 2006 7:22:50 PM

Loosening the timings has the same effect as reducing the ram speed. The Ram I have is guaranteed to run at 2-3-2-5 at 400mhz, so reducing the speed it should have no problems with the timings. Also, its 100% memtest stable at 500 mhz 3-3-2-5 so the ram isnt the problem.

Im now absolutely certain its the motherboard as its having little problems pretty much everywhere. Im thinking of grabbing the Gigabyte SLI one which supports a V core of 1.75v, and is also the cheapest decent S939 mobo at the moment (£65 at overclockers). Im still looking around though and might be tempted to splash out on a DFI.
!